That the kingdom may flourish
* Miriam Adeney's editorial on the dangers of short-term mission projects was fantastic. She concisely dissected the critical issues and handled them in a fair and open manner. Too often churches and sending agencies are divided over the issue of short-termers vs. career missionaries. If the guidelines Adeney suggests are followed, I believe many of these problems can be overcome.

I grew up on the mission field and am currently preparing for career missions in Eastern Europe. I have learned from experience that education of volunteers is the key. Those who are untrained become a stumbling block to the indigenous church and a burden to the missionary. Often, especially in "popular" countries such as Russia and Kenya, the resident missionary becomes a tour guide for the volunteers. This is a waste of time and valuable human resources. On the other hand, groups that are well trained and clearly understand their goals and limitations can be highly effective. It is apparent from current trends that volunteer mission efforts will continue to grow in popularity. My prayer is that Adeney's advice will be heeded and the kingdom will flourish.

Kyle Kirkpatrick
Baton Rouge, La.

* I found Adeney's editorial short-sighted. The writer assumes the missions pie, in dollar terms, is only so large. Is this in fact true? The writer also assumes that "North America" is some sacred sending unit that cannot be disturbed by others in its role as "preeminent sender" of long-term missionaries. Could the "mantle" have moved to another nation or region? Is God stuck using North Americans? Does any organization, academic institution, or missions agency have a selfish interest in maintaining the supposed North American dominance ...